On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 17:08, Daniel Shahaf <d...@daniel.shahaf.name> wrote: > gst...@apache.org wrote on Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 20:51:17 -0000: >> Author: gstein >> Date: Wed Jul 13 20:51:17 2011 >> New Revision: 1146452 >> >> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1146452&view=rev >> Log: >> votes! >> >> Modified: >> subversion/branches/1.7.x/STATUS >> >> Modified: subversion/branches/1.7.x/STATUS >> URL: >> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/subversion/branches/1.7.x/STATUS?rev=1146452&r1=1146451&r2=1146452&view=diff >> ============================================================================== >> --- subversion/branches/1.7.x/STATUS (original) >> +++ subversion/branches/1.7.x/STATUS Wed Jul 13 20:51:17 2011 >> @@ -15,14 +15,6 @@ Status of 1.7.0: >> Candidate changes: >> ================== >> >> - * r1146013 >> - Improve notifications of paths skipped because they were conflicted >> - Justification: >> - Improves general usability of the svn client and the libsvn_client api >> - and would have to wait for 1.8.0 if it doesn't get in 1.7.0. >> - Votes: >> - +1: rhuijben, cmpilato >> - >> * r1146131, r1146134 >> Add svn_fs_verify() API. >> Justification: >> @@ -32,6 +24,10 @@ Candidate changes: >> +1: danielsh, rhuijben >> -1: stsp (no-op API change) >> -1: cmpilato (no-op API change -- will reconsider if real utility is >> added) >> + -1: gstein (callers have no idea if the function will do anything >> + since they don't know if they're working with 1.7.0 or >> + 1.7.10, so why bother to call it at all? cross your >> + fingers and hope?) > > svn_fs_version().minor > >> >> * r1146214, r1146381 >> Handle NULL inputs when stringifying svn_checksum_t. >> @@ -39,7 +35,8 @@ Candidate changes: >> Avoids segfaults. >> Votes: >> +1: danielsh >> - -0: cmpilato, rhuijben (problem is with callers, not implementation) >> + -0: cmpilato, rhuijben, gstein (problem is with callers, >> + not implementation) >> > > Just a reminder: this revision IS present on trunk, so someone please > suggest how to change trunk to avoid releasing this triply-(-0)ed change > in 1.8.0.
Fix the callers to avoid passing NULL. Or leave the API change in there. Note that we are voting -0 rather than applying a veto to your API change [on trunk]. I say that "we disagree, but not strongly enough to raise a stink". And "we'd prefer if you find a different solution" rather than "require to find". Cheers, -g
